16 Mar 2015
Order issued
ConcludedThe Madras High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: W.P. No.14011 of 2011
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2015-0025Nagapattinam, Tamil NaduJudgment 16 March 2015
Nagapattinam Police Grade II Police Constable (Driver) vs The Superintendent of Police and Others
The judgment of the Madras High Court records the following account. Grade-II constable driver [name withheld], Armed Reserve Nagapattinam attached to the DSP office, District Crime Record Bureau, was dismissed after Crime No.518 of 2008 (Velipalayam PS, IPC ss.379/427) and a departmental enquiry in which he did not participate and which examined PWs 1-3 ex parte (paras 2, 6); the DGP later converted the dismissal into compulsory retirement as a concession (paras 2, 8). Justice K.K. Sasidharan refused to interfere, treating the conversion itself as leniency (para 11). The petitioner relied on his subsequent acquittal in C.C.No.193 of 2009, but the court held a benefit-of-doubt acquittal does not undo departmental findings given the different standard of proof (paras 7-9). The writ petition was dismissed, leaving the compulsory retirement intact (para 12). Note: the misconduct (drunken fracas and forcible taking of money at Velipalayam bus stand, paras 3, 6) is criminality by an officer rather than an on-duty abuse of police power. The respondents' case (counter affidavit; AGP contending maximum punishment was commensurate) is at paras 3 and 5. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
Externally reportedV2
What this record means
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 16 March 2015 in W.P. No.14011 of 2011, the Madras High Court (Coram: K.K. Sasidharan, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Grade II Police Constable (Driver), Office of Deputy Superintendent of Police, District Crime Record Bureau, Nagapattinam.
- Register number
- TN 51 CW 0002
- Case reference
- W.P. No.14011 of 2011
- Court and date
- Madras High Court (Coram: K.K. Sasidharan, J.), 16 March 2015
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Grade II Police Constable (Driver), Office of Deputy Superintendent of Police, District Crime Record Bureau, Nagapattinam
- Present service status
- Recorded in the cited sources as compulsorily retired.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 427 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “The Director General of Police took a lenient view and modified the punishment. The modification of punishment itself was a concession. Such being the position, I do not find any reason to interfere in the matter.” (at para 11)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Disciplinary action upheld. Sentence: dismissal.
- Present status of the proceedings
- No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Current position
The Madras High Court judgment dated 16 March 2015 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“The Director General of Police took a lenient view and modified the punishment. The modification of punishment itself was a concession. Such being the position, I do not find any reason to interfere in the matter.” (para 11)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
Continuing record
Follow-up history
19 Sep 2026
(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.